Useless UN

[dalem]

What a stupid idea to say that the UN are useless. But i understrand, since it's a pro-US idea. You wan't to be the only one to command the world, you'd like to erase the other attempts to make it more equal (UE, UN ...).

What does the UN accomplish that is useful to the world, or in the interests of the U.S.? Those are the first reasonable questions to ask.

The answers to those questions have been debated honestly in this thread and others. The facts seem to support the idea that some of the tertiary programs related to health and education are relatively successful and useful, most of the secondary functions regarding different commissions and other overly political groups are either ineffectual, intellectually void (a la the Human Rights Commission), or antiDemocratic (the anti-U.S. and anti-Israel resolution Funrides). The UNSC itself has been shown to be the toothless entity that it is in recent years.

So what is the UN good for, and what should we expect of it, especially given the majority of its member makeup?

As I've said a jillion times on this board alone, I favor staying in the UN and expecting and demanding less of it while forging semi-durable alliances of democratic partner nations who can agree to get together on projects of mutual self-interest. And if we can knock off the odd ruthless dictator in the process, sign me up.

But the UN is fairly useless, and not a little bit dangerous.

-dale

[ZFBoxcar]

As I've said a jillion times on this board alone, I favor staying in the UN and expecting and demanding less of it while forging semi-durable alliances of democratic partner nations who can agree to get together on projects of mutual self-interest. And if we can knock off the odd ruthless dictator in the process, sign me up.

I've liked this idea for a long time, and Freedom House has provided us with a couple of maps indicating who should be in such an alliance:


The nations in green are considered to be free (as opposed to partly-free [beige] and not free [red]) as of 2005.

If we want to be a bit more "inclusive":


The nations in blue are electoral democracies (as of 2006)

[Ellopian]

What is goin on here? I have the impression you consider that the UN are useless since they do not promote or defend the exclusive interests of the US.. There are A LOT of cases where the UN have been of great use to promote peace around the world.
Finnaly i insist, this idea is dangerous, and its a G.W.BUSH-EXPANSIONIST inspired point of view.

[ZFBoxcar]

The problem with the UN is that tyrants get the same voice as representatives of democratic nations. This means that the interests of democracy and universal rights are harmed by the UN since it will vote against the interests of freedom whenever freedom inconveniences the dictators...which is most of the time.

[Ellopian]

I've liked this idea for a long time, and Freedom House has provided us with a couple of maps indicating who should be in such an alliance:


The nations in green are considered to be free (as opposed to partly-free [beige] and not free [red]) as of 2005.

If we want to be a bit more "inclusive":


The nations in blue are electoral democracies (as of 2006)

It's a very "naif" point of view, even if it is right and fair, because its highly risked to exclude dictatorships, with whom are you going to negociate then? Half the globe (not even in fact). You see that is the paradox of the UN, it is respected as an institution even by hard dictatorships. It's a bridge of conversation.
YYYYou connot

[ZFBoxcar]

It's a very "naif" point of view, even if it is right and fair, because its highly risked to exclude dictatorships, with whom are you going to negociate then? Half the globe (not even in fact). You see that is the paradox of the UN, it is respected as an institution even by hard dictatorships. It's a bridge of conversation.
YYYYou connot

It is respected by dictators because it allows them preserve their dictatorship! That is the problem, not something to be proud of. One can still talk to dictatorships (after all, I am not proposing cutting off diplomatic and trade relations with China), but that doesn't mean one has to make global policy with them. Resolutions should be decided on and voted on solely by free nations. And any dictatorship which reforms into a democracy would be welcome to join.

[Ellopian]

It is respected by dictators because it allows them preserve their dictatorship! That is the problem, not something to be proud of. One can still talk to dictatorships (after all, I am not proposing cutting off diplomatic and trade relations with China), but that doesn't mean one has to make global policy with them. Resolutions should be decided on and voted on solely by free nations. And any dictatorship which reforms into a democracy would be welcome to join.

I agree with you, but this is utopia, it doesn't work like that. After all, why complaining, the UN didn't prevent the US from declaring wars in Yougoslavia or Irak.

[Confed999]

and its a G.W.BUSH-EXPANSIONIST inspired point of view.

Then explain why we thought this way long before there was a G.W. Bush. You Euros are funny, you think it's ok to give tyrants a say in what happens in the rest of our countries, but we don't go for that kind of thing on this side of the pond...

I agree with you, but this is utopia, it doesn't work like that. After all, why complaining, the UN didn't prevent the US from declaring wars in Yougoslavia or Irak.

If the UN were worth a crap, no wars would have been needed.

[Ellopian]

Then explain why we thought this way long before there was a G.W. Bush. You Euros are funny, you think it's ok to give tyrants a say in what happens in the rest of our countries, but we don't go for that kind of thing on this side of the pond...

If the UN were worth a crap, no wars would have been needed.

Do you know how many tyrrants are great friends of the USA? what is your answer about it? USA helped tyrrants to get the power in many countries. Does the name Pinochet reminds you something?

Learn before talking, that's a good advice.

Anyway my point of view is that it's better to have the UN, instead of not having them. Wars will always exist, can you imagine how many wars would happen since the 50's if the UN didn't exist? What are u people, crazy or what?

[Confed999]

Do you know how many tyrrants are great friends of the USA?

Too many, and that is something I'm dead set against. All tyrants should be eliminated, in one way or another.

Learn before talking, that's a good advice.

Advice you should take yourself. Maybe you should read some more of my posts before making a comment like that about me, because you have no idea what you're talking about.

can you imagine how many wars would happen since the 50's if the UN didn't exist?

Can you imagine how many fewer tyrants there would be now?

[Parihaka]

Do you know how many tyrrants are great friends of the USA? what is your answer about it? USA helped tyrrants to get the power in many countries. Does the name Pinochet reminds you something?

Does the name Hussein reminds you something?

Learn before talking, that's a good advice.

Read what is under his name

[Ellopian]

Too many, and that is something I'm dead set against. All tyrants should be eliminated, in one way or another.

Advice you should take yourself. Maybe you should read some more of my posts before making a comment like that about me, because you have no idea what you're talking about.

Can you imagine how many fewer tyrants there would be now?

i don't get that last one. what UN has to do with tyrrans. You can't blame the UN about it..

[Confed999]

i don't get that last one. what UN has to do with tyrrans. You can't blame the UN about it..

The UN allows tyrants to have a say in the policy of the rest of us, so I certainly can say that.

It also protects them, Saddam and Kim come right to mind.

[Ellopian]

The UN allows tyrants to have a say in the policy of the rest of us, so I certainly can say that.

It also protects them, Saddam and Kim come right to mind.

Ok, that's why all the UN members protected saddam in the 1st Gulf war. Get serious man. You the Americans have one big problem : (please don't take that as an offence, i'm here to exchange ideas not to "fight"). You see all international relations like that : "ARE U WITH US OR AGAINST US ?" (BUSH said that). This is not reallistic and it will push you to declare war to every nation that don't agree with u. Do you get me? UN is a diplomatic organism, not a war-machine.

[Confed999]

Ok, that's why all the UN members protected saddam in the 1st Gulf war.

So was Saddam still in power after the Gulf war?

"ARE U WITH US OR AGAINST US ?"

What is the other choice?

This is not reallistic and it will push you to declare war to every nation that don't agree with u. Do you get me?

Yeah, you've watched too much state propaganda on TV, and haven't bothered to try to back it up with facts.

UN is a diplomatic organism, not a war-machine.

The UN is a haven for tyrants and mass murderers. They have no ability to get anything substantial done, and are definately not worth the money. They should stick to humanitarian issues, and they don't need any tyrants to do that job.